IPU Logo-top>>> VERSION FRANÇAISE  
 IPU Logo-middleInter-Parliamentary Union  
IPU Logo-bottomChemin du Pommier 5, C.P. 330, CH-1218 Le Grand-Saconnex/Geneva, Switzerland  

PHILIPPINES
CASE N° PHI/01 - CRISPIN BELTRÁN
CASE N° PHI/02 - SATURNINO OCAMPO
CASE N° PHI/03 - JOEL VIRADOR
CASE N° PHI/04 - TEODORO CASIÑO
CASE N° PHI/05 - LIZA MAZA
CASE N° PHI/06 - RAFAEL MARIANO

Resolution by consensus by the IPU Governing Council at its 179th session
(Geneva, 18 October 2006)


The Governing Council of the Inter-Parliamentary Union,

Having before it the case of Mr. Saturnio Ocampo, Mr. Joel Virador, Mr. Teodoro Casiño, Ms. Liza Maza and Mr. Rafael Mariano, incumbent members of the House of Representatives of the Philippines, which has been the subject of a study and report of the Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians following the Procedure for the Treatment by the IPU of Communications concerning Violations of the Human Rights of Members of Parliament,

Taking note of the report of the Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians, which contains a detailed outline of the case (CL/179/11(a)-R.1),

Referring to the resolution adopted at its 178th session (May 2006) on the case of Mr. Crispin Beltran,

Taking account ofthe indictments of 27 February, 21 April, 11 May and 7 June 2006 copies of which were conveyed to the Committee, and of the hearing the Committee held with Representatives Ocampo and Casiño during the 115th Assembly (October 2006),

Considering that the parliamentarians concerned were elected in the 2001 and 2004 elections respectively as party-list nominees (Bayan Muna, Anakpawis, Gabriela) under the Philippine electoral system to ensure the representation of underprivileged groups and minorities in the Philippine House of Representatives; they are all known to be outspoken critics of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo's policies,

Considering that the case of the parliamentarians concerned has to be placed in the following context: in January 2006, President Arroyo issued an executive order ordering the Interagency Legal Action Group to prepare cases of rebellion and sedition against suspected enemies of the State; in the early morning of 24 February 2006, the military announced that it had foiled a plot to unseat President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo; before noon of the same day, President Arroyo issued Presidential Proclamation 1017 placing the country under a state of national emergency and issued General Order 5 entitled "Directing the Armed Forces of the Philippines in the face of national emergency, to maintain public peace, order and safety and to prevent and suppress lawless violence". As a consequence, all rally permits issued to various groups by the Mayor of Manila to celebrate the 20th anniversary of the end of the Marcos regime were revoked, and the rallies of several groups were indeed dispersed; on 3 March 2006, the widely criticized state of emergency was lifted and Order No. 5 was subsequently declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court,

Considering the following information on file:

  • On 25 February 2006, Mr. Crispin Beltran "was invited" for questioning by police belonging to the Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG); at the CIDG, he was shown an arrest warrant on a rebellion charge dating back to 1985; although the police were told by his lawyer that the warrant, which stemmed from an inciting-to-rebellion case filed by the Marcos regime, had long been quashed, the police refused to release him; later that day, a case was filed against him for allegedly inciting to rebellion at a rally held on 24 February 2006 in commemoration of the ousting of the Marcos regime; counter-affidavits were issued stating that this was untrue and that Mr. Beltran had never given any such speech; on 27 February and 4 March 2006, two new charges of rebellion were brought against him, one of conspiring with an army officer involved in an attempted coup d'état in 2003 and another one linking him to the Communist Party of the Philippines; on 23 March 2006, the Quezon City Metropolitan Court, which was handling the inciting-to-sedition case, ordered his release; he was, however, kept in detention on the ground that rebellion was a continuing crime; an amended indictment against him was filed on 7 June 2006; Mr. Beltran is 71 years old and his state of health has worsened in detention; he is currently being kept under police surveillance at the Philippine Heart Center;

  • On 25 February 2006 a team of police officers attempted to arrest Representative Ocampo of the Bayan Muna party after he spoke at a press conference held by the opposition; the police had no arrest warrant and were unable to say on what grounds he was to be arrested; on 27 February 2006, charges of rebellion were brought against him and Representatives Virador, Casiño, Maza and Mariana on account of their alleged involvement in a conspiracy with right-wing soldiers to overthrow President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo; knowing that they faced arrest, on 27 February 2006 all five parliamentarians sought protective custody in the House of Representatives; on 28 February, the House unanimously adopted a resolution affirming the right of the persons concerned to due process and granting them "protective custody" in the absence of any judicially issued arrest warrant resulting from a preliminary investigation or indictment; on 1 March 2006, the Senate adopted Resolution 69, stressing that the rights of the parliamentarians in question, as guaranteed under the Constitution and national law, needed to be upheld and that the Philippine Congress had a duty to continue affording them protection,
Considering that on 21 April 2006 the State Prosecutor issued an amended indictment for the crime of rebellion against a large number of accused, including the parliamentarians concerned; on 4 May 2006, Judge Delorino of the Regional Trial Court for Makati City dismissed the case; the parliamentarians concerned left the House of Representatives; however, the Secretary of Justice stated that other charges might still be brought against them,

Considering that, indeed, on 11 May 2006, a new case was filed against them, largely based on the previous one that had been dismissed, bringing against the parliamentarians concerned and others three charges of rebellion, one of which is reportedly unspecified, alleging that as members of the underground Communist Party (CPP) or affiliated organizations created by them as legal front organizations of the CPP, they committed the crime of rebellion by conspiring, confederating and mutually helping each other to overthrow the Government by using their position as legislators to ensure the victory of the armed struggle, inter alia by providing the funds allocated to them as legislators to finance the armed rebellion and by organizing protest marches which were to culminate on 24 February 2006 when the CPP legal front organizations, led by the parliamentarians concerned, would converge with the military and then, on 1 May 2006, overthrow the Government,

Noting in this respect the following: the various indictments issued contain essentially unsubstantiated and excessively broad allegations, including murder and armed confrontations between the New People's Army (NPA) guerrilla and government troops; the CPP, of which the parliamentarians concerned are accused of being members, had no longer been considered an illegal organization since 1992; according to the Omnibus motion filed by the defendants to strike out the amended indictment of 21 April 2006, the evidence presented to substantiate the allegations made in the indictments consists of affidavits which are not duly certified and, with the exception of one affiant, Jaime Beltran Fuentes who, on 13 March 2006, appeared before the prosecuting panel as a hooded witness, none of the affiants, mostly alleged former members of the CPP/NPA who have surrendered or were captured and are working for the anti-insurgency campaign, appeared in person before the prosecuting panel to swear to the truth of their affidavits; the rest of the evidence is said to be irrelevant, hearsay and unauthenticated pieces of paper such as CPP/NPA education and propaganda materials, police and military intelligence documents, news releases, documents of legal mass organizations, excerpts of unknown documents, newsletters and death certificates; noting also that Mr Casiño was two years old when the crimes of which he is accused were allegedly committed and that, when this question was brought to the attention of the Secretary of Justice, he reportedly stated that this was a matter for the defence to raise,

Considering that, acting upon a petition for certiorari and prohibition, on 5 June 2006 the Supreme Court issued a Status Quo Order ordering, commanding and directing the Department of Justice (DOJ), the State prosecutors and the Police to maintain the status quo and refrain from conducting any further preliminary investigation pending further orders from the court,

Noting that, upon Judge Delorino's dismissal of the amended indictment of 21 April 2006, the Department of Justice filed a motion for Judge Delorino to decline to act in the case for having been biased in handling the case; the Judge indeed did so; another Judge to whom the case was then transferred declined to act in the case on her own initiative and the case is now pending before Judge Alameda from another branch of the Makati Regional Court; considering that, on 22 August 2006, he suspended proceedings against Representatives Ocampo, Virador, Casiño, Maza and Mariano "in deference to whatever resolution the Supreme Court will issue on the pending certiorari proceedings"; that this decision, however, does not concern Mr. Beltran owing to an earlier court decision finding probable cause in his case; a motion for reconsideration of that decision was rejected on 29 August 2006 on the ground that rebellion was a continuing offence and subject to arrest without warrant; noting further that efforts are under way to have Representative Beltran transferred to the custody of the House of Representatives,

Considering further that in October 2006 a new rebellion case was brought against 50 persons in connection with the February 2006 demonstrations; that, although the parliamentarians concerned are not mentioned in that case, the Secretary of Justice reportedly stated that it might be consolidated with the case currently pending against them,

Considering also that the Secretary of Justice, in interviews with local and national media, stated that the parliamentarians concerned were guilty; in an ABS-CBN television interview on 31 March 2006, he said "we will just declare probable cause, then it's up to the court to decide" and President Arroyo stated in an interview with the Philippine Star on 12 March 2006 that the parliamentarians concerned "committed a crime. They are committing a continuing crime. And we have laws to deal with that. In fact, they are disrupting the work in Congress with what they are doing",

Considering further that, on 26 May 2006, the Secretary of Justice and the Cabinet Oversight Committee on Internal Security barred Mr. Ocampo, who had been granted official authorization from the Speaker of the House of Representative to travel to Jakarta, from doing so; on 12 June 2006, he was again prevented from travelling abroad to attend the 95th International Labour Conference; on 20 June, the Makati Regional Court granted him leave to travel abroad; despite this, the Department of Justice appears to have kept his name on the list of persons subjected to a travel ban as he faced difficulties in leaving the country to travel to Geneva; noting that, under the Constitution of the Philippines, a citizen's right to travel is recognized and thus can only be curtailed by order of a competent court of law,

Considering that, in reply to its requests for information and a response to its concerns, the Secretary of Justice, in his letters of 26 April and 28 June 2006, affirmed that Mr. Beltran and the others had been formally charged with violating certain national security laws and that their current status was in accordance with the rules of procedure; as to Mr. Beltran, he was being kept in detention since rebellion was a non-bailable offence,

Noting that elections are due to be held in the Philippines in 2007 and that the National Security Advisor reportedly stated publicly that he would do his utmost to secure the disqualification of the political parties to which the parliamentarians concerned belong,

Bearing finally in mind that the Philippines is a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and thus bound to respect freedom of expression, assembly and association, the right to liberty and the right to fair trial,

  1. Expresses deep concern at the charges brought against the parliamentarians concerned and notes in this respect: (i) the filing of a new case against Representatives Ocampo, Virador, Casiño, Maza and Mariano based on charges that the court had dismissed on 14 March 2006; (ii) the continuous efforts of the prosecution to bring amended indictments, all based on the same broad allegations; (iii) the circumstances of the arrest and detention of Mr. Beltran on highly questionable grounds; (iv) the inhibition of two judges; and (v) the public statements of President Arroyo and the Secretary of Justice which clearly prejudge the guilt of the persons concerned in defiance of the fundamental principle of the presumption of innocence;

  2. Fears that all this suggests that the persons concerned are prosecuted on the basis of considerations alien to the law;

  3. Is puzzled at the notion of a continuing crime, which entails serious consequence such as arrest without warrant, and wishes to ascertain on what legal basis and procedure it is based; recalls that the human right to personal liberty implies that individuals can only be deprived of their liberty on legal grounds and under a procedure established by law, both of which must conform to international standards;

  4. Is further deeply concerned that the prosecution attempts to criminalize legally authorized political parties which participated in the 2001 and 2004 elections and the parliamentary work of their representatives, and stresses that freedom of expression and of assembly are cornerstones of democracy; considers that this constitutes a grave attack on parliament itself and should therefore be of concern to the parliamentary authorities; calls on them to monitor the investigation and would appreciate the observations of the parliamentary authorities in this respect;

  5. Is, moreover, deeply concerned that Mr. Ocampo was prevented from travelling abroad although there was no court order to such effect and that, even when the court explicitly authorized his travel abroad, he faced difficulties in so doing;

  6. Notes that the case is currently pending before the Supreme Court, all further procedural steps having been stopped; that those against Representative Beltran are nevertheless continuing;

  7. Remains deeply concerned, in the light of the foregoing, at the continuing detention of Mr. Beltran, which it fears is arbitrary; and calls once again on the authorities to release him forthwith or at the very least to transfer him to the custody of the House of Representatives;

  8. Requests the Secretary General to convey this resolution to the authorities and the parliamentarians concerned;

  9. Requests the Committee to continue examining this case and report to it at its next session, to be held on the occasion of the 116th Assembly (April-May 2007).
Note: you can download a complete electronic version of the brochure "Results of the 115th IPU Assembly and related meetings in PDF format (file size 493K approximately ). This version requires Adobe Acrobat Reader, which you can download free of charge.Get Acrobat Reader

HOME PAGEred cubeHUMAN RIGHTSred cubeMAIN AREAS OF ACTIVITYred cubeIPU STRUCTURE AND DOCUMENTS